Beach Notes

2010-06-28T11:47:00.000-07:00

“Do you fear the force of the wind,

The slash of the rain?

Go face them and fight them,

Be savage again.

Go hungry and cold like the wolf,

Go wade like the crane.

The palms of your hands will thicken,

The skin of your forehead tan –

You’ll be ragged and swarthy and weary

But – you’ll walk like a man.”

- Hamlin Garland

Back in Action

2010-06-24T13:58:00.000-07:00

I can explain. You all probably thought I abandoned this blog after I've been gone for the past two weeks, but that's not like me. I could just tell you that I was on vacation, but that's too easy an out. So I'll explain... I was in the desert shooting guns. No really, here's proof.

I spent about a week with family and friends out in the scorching, searing desert of Nevada at a training facility called Front Sight. It's a self-proclaimed bastion of Second Amendment enforcement in the United States. Their goal is to provide the highest level of arms training to citizens, law enforcement, and soldiers while at the same time raising the level of gun education and awareness among users. They have identified a serious problem in the United States - the lack of gun education among users. We all like to wave our Second Amendment right around in the face of the world, but the reality is that we have neglected the responsibility that comes with that right. People do a lot of stupid things with guns in their hands. Sure, the media can be gun-phobic and blow the problem out of proportion, but what other choice do we give them when gun users are continually injuring themselves or innocent people by simple user error.

Front Sight's commitment to preserving the Second Amendment through training responsible, educated gun users was impressive to say the least. When I arrived I had no idea how to hold, load, or shoot a Glock 9mm, but after several days I was clearing jams, drawing from a holster, and shooting accurately from distance. Their training is nothing short of phenomenal, better than the military and police force I must say, just by hearing all the personal stories from cops and soldiers who frothed over the level of training they received at Front Sight. Check them out at FrontSight.com.

Oh, and the other reason I disappeared: Las Vegas. By coincidence, sheer luck you might even say, it was only 45 minutes away. Okay, maybe we planned it that way.

Book Recommendation

2010-06-01T14:24:00.000-07:00

Melanie Phillip's new book The World Turned Upside Down is a provocative, hard-hitting look into the major ideological battlefields dividing America and the Western World. As a journalist first and foremost, Phillips accomplishes what few great journalists can - seeing through the swamp of emotional and sensational news to the cold, hard facts of the issues. She debunks today's popular myths and misconceptions with clear, poignant writing and research. Her book is so well documented it doubles as a handbook for key issues like global warming, the war on terror, and the secular attacks on Western religion. The World Turned Upside Down reveals the destructive ideologies eating away at religion, morality, and truth - the core of American greatness. Phillips, a British journalist, combats American popular culture in a way that few writers can, as an outsider looking in, not someone caught in the day-to-day, tit-for-tat battles Americans engage in.

At its core, The World Turned Upside Down recognizes the backwards state of politics and culture in the West due to the loss of religion and the dependance of man on his own reason. Modern society tells us that faith and reason are inseparable, but Phillips proves the opposite. Christianity and the Bible gave us our foundations for knowledge, progress, and order, she argues. Without that foundation, the world as we once knew it is eroding in front of our eyes. Above economic debt, foreign threats, and faulty science, the abandonment of religion poses the greatest threat to the West, she says, opening us up for attacks on all sides, from radical Islam to secular humanism. The World Turned Upside Down is a cautionary tale; if we continue down this spiraling path, the world will truly be standing on its head.

Enough with the "Hope"

2010-05-27T13:20:00.000-07:00

CNN reported today that we have had more reported terrorist attempts on American soil last year than in all the years combined from 2002 to 2009. Only weeks after the failed car bombing of New York's Times Square, the Department of Homeland Security says "the number and pace of attempted attacks against the United States over the past nine months have surpassed the number of attempts during any other previous one-year period."

This frightening assessment is contained in an unclassified DHS intelligence memo prepared for various law enforcement groups, which says terror groups are expected to try attacks inside the United States with "increased frequency."

To put it bluntly: America has become more dangerous and vulnerable over the past 17 months, rather than safer and stronger. President Obama capitalized on the anti-Bush rhetoric during the election, but what evidence does he have to offer that he has improved homeland security so far.

CNN's story comes on the heels of Pres. Obama debuting his new national security strategy based on diplomacy rather than war. To quote the White House report, "Our long-term security will not come from our ability to instill fear in other peoples but through our capacity to speak to their hopes." So instead of being protector and enforcer, the United States will be the world's motivational coach. Enough with the "hope." The hope of radical Islamics is to kill the infidels. The hope of Iran is to destroy Israel. This is the type of naive, backwards, idealistic policy that thinks we can keep everyone safe by making everyone happy. It's absurd, and don't be shocked if the number of terrorist attacks continue to rise in the United States.

Problems Ahead

2010-05-25T06:19:00.000-07:00

How about a NY Times story that starts like this:
"Across Western Europe, the 'lifestyle superpower,' the assumptions and gains of a lifetime are suddenly in doubt. The deficit crisis that threatens the euro has also undermined the sustainability of the European standard of social welfare, built by left-leaning governments since the end of World War II."

Finally, a breath of fresh air for capitalists and a strong dose of reality for European socialists. For years, Europeans have boasted of their milk and honey welfare programs with early retirements and generous pensions. But with aging populations and rising budget deficits, it looks like their social welfare programs are finally catching up to them economically. While the rest of the financial world holds their breath, Europe is perched precariously on the cliff of economic disaster and might fall if they don't make changes soon. Read all the numbers and the rest of the NY Times story here.

From Europe to America, this story segues perfectly into a separate piece written by Arthur Brooks about the ongoing tug-of-war between free enterprise and government control in American culture. Read that story here.

Radical Islam

2010-05-18T19:02:00.000-07:00

We played the audio from this video on Morning In America last week and I can't help forget the bone chilling answer the Muslim student gives. This video shows a side of radical Islam that the world isn't prepared for - an English speaking, female student who supports Hamas and the killing of the Jewish people. How many more wake up calls do we need?

Decline in Morality

2010-05-17T14:33:00.000-07:00

A new Gallup poll describes what many of us have been predicting for a long time - a steady decline in morality in America. 45% of those surveyed described morality in the U.S. as "poor" and only 15% could call it "excellent or good." The survey also said that 76% believe morality is getting worse, while only 14% said it was improving.

CNN's Jack Cafferty reported on the poll and asked the audience, "So what's wrong with us?"

I don't know what's more sad, reading the actual poll numbers, or hearing commentators wonder why morality is declining. Predictably, they will point to a wide variety of issues: failing education systems, breakdowns in the family, dishonesty in business, and drug and alcohol abuse. Yet, these feel good, psychology 101 answers all skirt the real issue, the loss of religion in America.

Since the beginning of Western thinking, religion and morality were inextricably interwined. From Plato to Aquinas, philosophers have wrestled with the relationship between the two. In a discussion of morality, to ignore religion is to ignore the verb of a sentence.

Is it mere coincidence that morality has slipped hand in hand with church attendence? According to a separate Gallup poll, only 41.6% of Americans reported that they attended church at least once a week or almost every week in 2009 (around 123 million Americans). A sad, but telling statistic for where America's morality lies.

By comparison, movie theater attendence jumped nearly 16% in 2009 according to the NY Times. If you want to see where America's priorities lie, look at the culture. Between sports, music, and television, religion has taken a backseat to entertainment. One can only hope that Americans will reconnect the dots between morality and religion. For as a scholar once said (and this quote is usally incorrectly attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville), "America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great."

Final Exams

2010-05-10T19:08:00.000-07:00

I apologize for the lack of posts this week. I'm in the middle of final exams and the Red Bulls are counting up and the hours of sleep are counting down. Anyways, only one more exam to go and I am free man. I sure am going to miss spending all day studying in the library and then all-night studying at IHOP. Bear with me and I'll be back soon with some substantive posts on something other than my physics test tomorrow.

Tragedy on Campus Part 2

2010-05-05T02:17:00.001-07:00

Sitting in class yesterday, I almost fell out of my chair when I read that my post on college violence had been posted on NRO's Corner and the FRC blog. I'll admit that it was hard for me to pay attention for the rest of that class. I hope I offered some valuable personal insight into my college experience, and apparently, I even stirred up some controversy along the way.

A reader emailed a rebuttal to my post to NRO, which they published, followed by another reader's response to that. The whole conversation happened HERE. I know my reply won't make it back to NRO, but I'd like to address the first rebuttal of my argument here for all you kind souls who came back to my blog. The respondent said the following about my post:

The total number of students enrolled in US colleges and universities is about 15 million (that's only undergrads, http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/school.html); 325 of those are at Patrick Henry College. If the number of college deaths at Patrick Henry College exactly equaled the national average, it would be 0.02 per 5 years (based on the 857 number your PHC student refers to), or one every 50 years. I'm fine with private colleges setting whatever rules they want for their students, but if this is the best defense he can come up with for the rules imposed by Patrick Henry College, which include martial-law features like a curfew, his case is pretty weak.

First, I admitted candidly in my post that the statistics do not line up on a purely mathematical basis. Patrick Henry College has 300+ students; UVA has closer to 30,000. The purpose of the post was to offer insight from my personal experience into the value systems of Patrick Henry College and why we are different from a majority of college campuses. I chose deaths as the statistic of comparison because that was the topic of the UVA news story, unfortunately. I might add that STDs and drugs are almost nonexistent at PHC and that only a handful of students are sexually active -- a very real, healthy difference that you won't find statistics on.

Second, the college's curfew is anything but martial-law. In fact, I live off campus. There are no curfew restrictions on me, but if I plan on visiting campus at 3 am I can expect the doors to be locked and a security guard to let me in. Those in their junior year or 21-years and older are not subject to curfew either. They can come and go as they please, but they aren't allowed into dorms of the opposite sex after curfew hours.

Despite what the Harvard student insuates, the rules at PHC are not Draconian. They are calculated to protect the student body and be flexible enough to look out for their best interests. The larger point here is not the rules-based society but the Christian culture. The ethos at PHC respects life, property, and morals and as a collective we hold each other to a higher Biblical standard. If you want to see real, breathing statistics come visit the school. I promise you will notice a difference.

Tragedy on College Campuses

2010-05-03T18:24:00.000-07:00

In less than two weeks from today I will graduate from Patrick Henry College and finish four years of my undergraduate. Looking back, I can remember a lot of the typical college experiences– late night studying, spring break road trips, and nights out with your friends. I’m fortunate to say that I was never involved or associated in one particular college trend in all of my four years – violence or murder.

Having personally known one of the girls shot at Virginia Tech on April 16^th, 2007, my heart breaks every time I hear of college-related violence and the pointless death of innocent students.

Today, my heart goes out to the family of Yeardley Love, a 22-year-old lacrosse player and student at the University of Virginia, murdered yesterday by her on-and-off 22-year-old boyfriend.

The thought of such a tragedy makes me wonder why my experience at college has been so different from a majority of the campuses across America. In four years, my school has not had a single murder, suicide, or violent crime.

Considering that the USA Today calculated 857 college student deaths from 2000 to 2005, how does one school manage to escape unscathed? It’s certainly not chance or luck. For Patrick Henry College, it’s in our Christian culture.

Critics mock us for our strict rules – like no dancing or drinking on campus, no members of the opposite sex permitted in your dorm room, nightly curfew hours – and the lack of a social atmosphere it creates. We have been the subject of books (God’s Harvard), television shows, op-eds, and countless blogs who rant against our brand of overbearing right-wing Christianity that poisons society’s freedom.

Yet, what is the cost of students being able to “express” themselves? Is that freedom worth the cost of drunk driving deaths, drug related violence, and love affairs turned fatal?

I’m certainly not saying that Christians are not capable of committing the same, if not worse crimes. But the culture of Christianity and the rules we hold ourselves to at Patrick Henry lay substantial roadblocks to violent or illegal behavior.

Granted, our entire school population would be one or two classes at UVA, but the fact remains that Patrick Henry College has it’s own recipe for student safety that is active and working. I’ll be the first to admit that I’ve broken the college’s rules, but as I look back, I realize that in many ways those same laws saved me from myself.

Non-Christians who are reading this right now are sure to be shaking their heads at me. How can you use one unfortunate crime to wave your rules over our heads and try to enforce your agenda on us? I understand that many people are turned off by Christianity and its giant “rulebook.” But as the number of college related attacks and crimes rise, and as more campuses are scarred with senseless deaths, I hope universities will consider the facts before them and realize that there is a way to prevent future heartbreaks – commit to enforcing tough, moral laws and foster a community of students who want to uphold those laws.

Cultural Note

2010-04-27T11:05:00.000-07:00

Any listener to Morning In America knows that music is a large part of the show. You won’t hear the music we play on the radio’s Top 20, but from time to time we like to feature new, upcoming artists. The artists we pick, like Taylor Swift or Julianne Hough, are extremely gifted musicians, but they also represent an unfortunately small sector of the music industry that conveys positive and ethical messages in their music. We highlight their music to combat the steady stream of garbage that follows your kids through the television and internet and into your home.

Within the past couple of months there has dawned a new front in the counter-culture war – music videos. Now, music videos have been around since MTV’s birth in 1981, but they were largely innocent, dance routines with weak subplots. Granted, it’s hard to make a particularly offensive movie in under four minutes, but in the past couple of months, several extremely offensive music videos have found ways to break the traditional MTV mold and shock even the most culturally desensitized. There are no ratings or warnings on these videos. They are floating free on the ocean of internet music sites with only a few blogs slapping on the weak label of NSFW (Not Safe For Work).

Three music videos in particular standout from the crowd. The most popular is the video for the song “Telephone” by Lady Gaga and Beyonce, two of the most famous female pop stars around today. The 9-minute video (the song is only about 4 minutes) features nudity, extremely offensive language, violence, and disturbing themes. On a movie rating scale, the song is a PG pop song about girls not wanting to answer their phones while they’re dancing. The music video is a hard R-rated short film with lesbian make-out scenes and overtones of misandrism.

The next culprit is rap/ hip-hop artist Erykah Badu and the video for the song “Window Seat.” In a nutshell, the female African-American rapper strips down in the streets of Dallas in Dealey Plaza, the same area where JFK was assassinated. Besides the obvious nudity, the video makes perturbing references to the actual assassination. What was the public reaction? One Washington Post blogger called it a “big, bold artistic statement.”

And the most recent viral earthquake came a few days ago with the release of M.I.A.’s video for her new song “Born Free.” The female British singer, who is the daughter of a former revolutionary from Jaffna who trained in Lebanon with Palestinian militants associated with Fatah, is popular with many teenagers and her music was featured in the soundtrack to “Slum Dog Millionaire.” Music fans that go searching for her newest work will be shocked at what they find. The video for “Born Free” runs over 8-minutes and chronicles soldiers, wearing U.S. flags on their sleeves, busting into settlements and rounding up red-headed children and then taking them off to the desert to kill them. This obvious, political parody of American forces overseas features sex, nudity, strong language and extreme violence that would make an R-rated film blush.

We all know that “sex sells,” but this latest trend is capitalizing on a new mantra – “controversy sells.” Most of these videos have been banned from MTV and YouTube, but they are still available all over the web for any curious observer. Parents know the difficulties in keeping inappropriate movies out of their home, but music videos presents an even more serious problem. There are no industry ratings or warnings and young adults who hear a favorite song on the radio will often go online to look up the music video. Sadly, videos of these flavors tarnish the innocence of music videos as a medium and ultimately, our children. Of these three videos, it is interesting to note that they are performed by female artists. Is this the new breed of feminism that we support?

Common Sense Conservatism

2010-04-08T09:25:00.000-07:00

I spent Easter weekend with some of my relatives, all who are staunch Democrats. They listen to NPR, watch CNN, read the NY Times and even consume a little Michael Moore on their free time. Worst of all, they know I work for Bill Bennett. So naturally, politics always seems to rear its ugly head at family events. I don’t visit my extended family very regularly, so when I do, it feels like they’ve been storing up political ammo to use against me. This time the gunfight was over tea partiers.

Their side of the conversation went something like this:

“How can you listen to Rush Limbaugh and other conservative talkers?! There practically provoking race riots against the President.”

“The Republicans are the party of ‘No’ and they hate everything the Democrats try to do.”

“Republicans are all radicals now and anyone they disagree with, even in their own party, they want to throw out.”

Now, these conversations do read a lot like MSNBC talking points. Do the liberal media try and paint tea partiers as radical, racist, and even violent demonstrators? YES. Do they take isolate incidents of extremism and generalize about the entire movement? YES.

BUT, as a conservative, I started to ask myself, “Do we do more to squelch these allegations or more to fuel them?”

Recent events have again brought this question to my mind.

This week Tom Coburn called Nancy Pelosi a nice person and admonished those who said she was not, especially those who do not know her. The outrage on the show this week from listeners was ludicrous. Callers slammed Coburn saying that Pelosi and the Democrats are evil and we are in a fight for our freedoms and shouldn’t bother being nice. The overwhelming response from callers was against Bill, who took the side of Coburn in this argument.

I understand that most conservatives have reached their boiling point over the long months of health care debate, but that is still not reason enough to warrant the type of hatred and cynicism that I’ve seen lately.

I’m not saying we should get in bed with the Democrats or bend over backwards for them, but remember that Republicans represent a mere 30 percent of the electorate. To win elections, we must make alliances and draw independents and Democrats to our side. If we forget that, we will be in the permanent minority.

Granted, we cannot sell ourselves out or sacrifice our principles. However, we can show some civility, and an occasional kind word about an opponent is not betrayal. We should stand on steely reserve and conviction, not cynicism and hatred.

Ronald Reagan, the champion of tea partiers and conservatives, reached out to work with the Democrats. So much in fact, we still have REAGAN DEMOCRATS today. Reagan did not sell out, but he treated Democrats with respect and that made him the most popular president of my generation and an example we should not forget.

Breakfast Runs

2010-04-02T03:19:00.000-07:00

World Famous Ben's Chili Bowl at 6 a.m. We will always go to great lengths for great food. That is our breakfast motto here at Morning In America.

Obama Love

2010-03-31T02:33:00.001-07:00

Roger Cohen wrote a gushing, head-over-heels op-ed about President Obama's health care victory in the NY Times yesterday. Not only is health care an enormous domestic success, but its passage is also a major foreign policy win for Obama, says Cohen. Listen to this,

"This man is no softie. He’s a politician tough enough to watch his rivals auto-destruct on his cool, and principled enough to set the right long-term objectives, including 'comprehensive diplomatic contacts and dialogue' with Iran, as he said in his second Nowruz, or New Year, greeting to Iranians."

Cohen is simply starstruck. One health care bill, that barely passed both Houses even with the largest Democratic majority in decades and without a single Republican vote and with a majority of the nation against it, and Obama has become the Democrat's Übermensch. If Cohen loves Obama this much, then he would have really loved LBJ.

Think about it, LBJ gave us Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, all programs that current Democrats heralded as "historic legislation" during the health care debates. Has Cohen learned anything from history? How did LBJ's foreign policy fare? The answer: horribly. Johnson began the United State's military involvement in Vietnam, a war that made him rapidly unpopular and led to his failed re-election bid.

To say that President's Obama's health care bill is a "foreign policy victory," as Cohen terms it, is absurd. He goes on to say that,

"It fell to Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, to play the role Khrushchev once played in toughening a young American president.
The former Soviet leader thought he could browbeat Kennedy only to discover, in Vienna, that the Kennedy charm was not unalloyed to steel ('It will be a long, cold winter.') Netanyahu was the first foreign leader to think he could steamroll Obama. He earned a frosty comeuppance."

Victor David Hanson wrote a great response to Cohen's argument on the Corner at National Review. He highlights several reasons why Cohen's analogy fails. First, Netanyahu is not the first foreign leader to think he could steamroll Obama- Putin pulled the wool over Obama's eyes with his phony Iran missile deal and Ahmadinejad has been pushing forward with nuclear development at an unfettered pace. Second, Khruschev was the leader of a Communist regime trying to squelch freedom all across Asia and Eruope; Netanyahu is the leader of a democracy that has been a staunch ally of the United States. If Cohen is going to compare a leader of America's allies to the former head of Communist Russia, he should study his history first.

Legalization of Pot (Part 2)

2010-03-29T18:18:00.000-07:00

In my last post I outlined my initial arguments against California’s quest to legalize marijuana. I concluded by adding that I would follow up with the statistics to support my arguments. So here are the cold hard facts against the legalization of pot and why it will not solve California’s budget crises.

Proponents of California’s plan say:

Regulation of marijuana will bring its distribution under the rule of law.

At the center of California’s quest for legalization is Richard Lee, founder of Oaksterdam University, an training program designed to industrialize and professionalize the cannabis industry within Oakland, California. His idea is to create a city much like Amsterdam, where pot is legalized, regulated, and sold just like beer or liquor.

He, along with the other proponents of legalizing marijuana, believe that if the government can regulate the drug, it will eliminate drug dealers and black market buyers. They look at Amsterdam as their shining city on the hill. What they don’t realize is the tremendous crime and underground drug markets that followed the legalization of pot into Amsterdam. In 2008, Amsterdam began closing marijuana shops because of the criminality it brought with it. The presence of hard drugs, and subsequently crime, skyrocketed in the city. The reality is that legalizing pot gives hard drug dealers a completely legitimate front to their business, making them more elusive than ever before.

The illegal market for pot will not wither and die if the government seizes control. If the state sets the limit at one ounce, dealers will start selling two ounces. If California raises taxes on it, consumers will go to dealers who can sell it cheaper. By allowing citizens to grown their own pot, California is training an army of individual salesmen who will find ways to make their product cheaper and more potent than the government’s.

I might also add that Amsterdam boasts legalized prostitution. Is this the city we want to model ourselves after?

Legalizing marijuana will generate billions in revenue for the state of California through sales and taxes.

Supporters of the bill say legalizing marijuana could save the state $200 million a year by reducing public safety costs. It could also generate tax revenue for local governments, along with the unseen and uncalculated economic impact for California: tourists, much like the ones who dashed to Amsterdam, who will flood to California to taste the forbidden fruit. The idea is to model California’s marijuana industry after the existing billion dollar alcohol and cigarette industries in the United States.

What these supporters fail to report is the fact that alcohol and cigarette users cost the states millions of dollars each year for rehabilitation and recovery. As of 2008, California had 208 drug courts alone, more than any other state in the nation. (http://www.adp.ca.gov/FactSheets/DrugCourtPrograms.pdf.) In 1998, California spent almost $11 billion to deal with substance abuse and addiction, according to The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. Obviously alcohol and hard drugs contribute the most to these statistics, but these numbers alone illuminate the already staggering burden that illegal or harmful substances cost the state.

As logic would have it, if you increase the number of drug users, you will increase the number of drug abusers. (Jack Cole, executive director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) and supporter of legalization, claims that there were 800,000 people arrested last year on marijuana charges.) So while California might arrest less criminals and clear some space in their prisons, there will no doubt be more drug abusers checking into rehab and more serious drug users on the streets.

Those who disagree with these statistics would argue that marijuana is inherently less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes (which seems to be true given scientific research) and will in no way incur the same costs to society. For argument’s sake, let’s compare some of the cost problems in an area that we know overlaps in terms of health risks: parental smoking.

Scientists on both sides of the aisle can go back and forth discussing the health risks of THC, the golden ingredient in cannabis, but any doctor can tell you that smoking hurts unborn babies and infants. Anytime you smoke, whether cigarettes or pot, you deny oxygen to the baby and risk serious health injuries. In the United States alone, “parental smoking has been estimated to cause direct medical expenditures of more than $2.5 billion per year to care for smoking-caused problems of exposed newborns, infants, and children.”(Aligne, CA & Stoddard, JJ, “Tobacco and Children: An Economic Evaluation of the Medical Effects of Parental Smoking,” Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 151:648-653, July 1997.)

In other studies, states actually saved money through cigarette prevention programs due to the reduction in health care costs. Research in California shows that its program, which began in 1989, reduced state healthcare costs by more than $100 million in its first seven years just by reducing the number of smoking-caused low-birthweight babies, with more than $11 million of those savings in the first two years. (Lightwood, JM, et al., “Short-Term Health and Economic Benefits of Smoking Cessation: Low Birth Weight,” Pediatrics, 104(6):1312-1320, December 1999.) Subsequent research indicates that California’s overall cost savings from reducing all smoking-affected births and birth complications during its first two years totaled roughly $20 million. (Miller, P, et al., “Birth and First-Year Costs for Mothers and Infants Attributable to Maternal Smoking,” Nicotine & Tobacco Research 3(1):25-35, February 2001.)

By legalizing pot, California will be reversing the savings generated by the existing cigarette prevention programs. If Californians want to rescue their sinking economy, they should build on some of their current, working programs. A healthier population is a cheaper population. California should be pushing their citizens away from drugs and toward healthy, cost-saving alternatives.

Legalizing marijuana will be far less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes, which are already legal.

Time and time again this is the argument that legalization supporters fall back on, as if it’s logical to right a wrong by allowing another. Granted, research to date suggests that marijuana is not as dangerous as alcohol or cigarettes, however, the problem is still serious enough that it does not warrant legalization.

First of all, any addiction doctor can tell you that pot is a legitimate gateway drug. The Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University found adolescents who smoke pot 85 times more likely to use cocaine than their non–pot smoking peers. And 60 percent of youngsters who use marijuana before they turn 15 later go on to use cocaine. For this reason alone, marijuana should be outlawed.

In 2007, Britain's The Guardian published an article describing the effects of smoking marijuana while pregnant. Evidence shows that the children of mothers who smoked during pregnancy are up to nine times more likely to develop attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) later in life. Rosalind Neuman, one of the authors of the study, said, "When genetic factors are combined with prenatal cigarette smoke exposure, the ADHD risk rises very significantly." These numbers do not take into account the additional increase in the risk of miscarriages, premature labor, and low birth rates due to the deprivation of oxygen to the baby.

All the these statistics come on the heels of CNN’s report last year that the average potency of marijuana exceeded 10 percent for the first time in 2009. Users today aren’t smoking the same type of pot their parents smoked in the 60s and 70s. Marijuana today is much more potent and most of the consumers do not realize it. While most of short term effects wear off within two or three hours, the drug itself lingers in the human body. THC is a fat-soluble substance that accumulates in the liver, lungs, and other organs and remains in the body for extended periods of time. Thus, frequent smoking can cause a harmful build up of THC that can lead to learning disabilities in children, short-term memory loss, schizophrenia, and may increase the risk of strokes and heart attacks.

Beyond the personal health risks of pot are the unforeseen consequences. The California statute plans to make it illegal to drive while consuming marijuana. No one will deny that marijuana impairs coordination and balance, delays reaction time, and diminishes short-term memory much like driving under the influence of alcohol. Mothers Against Drunk Driving report that in 2008, an estimated 11,773 people died in drunk driving crashes involving a driver with an illegal BAC (.08 or greater). No one can predict the magnitude of the effects that pot will have on drivers, but it will undoubtedly inflict serious damage on Californians in terms of property and lives.

Americans want pot to be legal.

This is not true across the board, but recent polls suggest that support is growing. In May, Zogby polling surveyed 3937 voters and reported that 52 percent of Americans favor legalization, while only 37 percent oppose. A previous ABC News/Washington Post poll found 46 percent in support. In California, a Field Poll demonstrated 56 percent back legalization and sparked California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to call for an open debate on the issue of legalization ahead of the expected vote next November.

Support for the legalization of marijuana is at an all-time high, and it is not coming from political leaders. While proponents of the plan tend to pinhole Republicans as their main opposition, even President Obama was asked at a townhall whether we should legalize marijuana to help the economy and create jobs. He replied bluntly, “The answer is no, I don't think that's a good strategy to grow our economy.” If support for legalization is not coming from Washington D.C. then it must be coming from the culture.

The stoner image was once associated with hippies, beatniks, and the new age movement. It was Cheech and Chong; a small segment of the population that no one took seriously. Today, the movement has taken on an entirely new mantra. Recent movies, like the 2008 stoner comedy, “Pineapple Express” which raked in approximately $101 million, portray weed as the average man’s coping mechanism for life’s problems. Society used to label drug users rebels; today, they’re cool. Rock stars and hip-hop artists glorify weed to the point where if you’re not smoking it, then you’re not normal. Our culture’s biggest icons can’t tell you who our last ten presidents are, but they can tell you ten different types of weed, ten ways to smoke it, and ten ways to grow it. Pot has become embedded in our collective bloodstream and now we have to fight harder than ever to cleanse ourselves of it.

2010-03-26T15:10:00.000-07:00

Cover of the Washington Post Express Today.

California thinks they have found a solution to their billion dollar budget deficit: legalizing pot. Yes, instead of cutting their budget and taking steps to boost their state economy, California lawmakers would rather jump the line straight to legalizing drugs. The subliminal message here is that legalizing marijuana has little to do with revenue problems, and more to do with the fact that pro-legalization Californians know they can mask legalization under the guise of an economy-saving program.

Let's take a look at the logic of their proposed plan. The initiative would allow all those over 21 years of age to possess up to one ounce of marijuana. California residents could also grow their own plants in gardens measuring up to 25 square feet. The proposal bans all users from using pot in public, around minors, in school zones, and while driving.

I want someone to explain to me how selling a drug that demotivates anyone from productive activity will benefit the economy. Proponents of the measure say it will save California $200 million a year by reducing public safety costs and generating tax revenue.

First of all, legalizing marijuana will not kill the illegal market for it. If the limit is one ounce, dealers will start selling two ounces. If California raises the taxes on it, consumers will go to dealers who sell it for cheaper. A huge black market will grow out of legalization. Not to mention the fact that it will give dealers of hard drugs a completely legitimate front for their business.

Second, California already has the most drug court programs in the nation and spends more money on drug rehab than anyone else. With legalization their problems will only get worse. If you increase the number of drug users, you will increase the number of drug abusers.

Third, how will this plan be enforced? Are police going to carry scales and measuring sticks around to tell what's more than one ounce and what's bigger than 25 square feet. This plan will be an enforcement nightmare. If drunk driving is one of the leading killers in the United States, who knows what destruction driving while high will do. Furthermore, if underage drinking is already a colossal problem, one can only expect underage consumption of pot to follow the same course.

I'm going to keep following this issue because it has popped up in other states as well and it's not going to die quietly. Washington D.C. is trying to legalize medicinal marijuana and Rhode Island is also considering legalizing consumption of pot for those 18-years-old and older. I'll post more of the numbers and facts to support my case, but just on its face, the argument for legalization will not help the economy or the welfare of the public.

Drug Problems in NFL

2010-03-25T16:35:00.000-07:00

Sports Illustrated had a very illuminating piece yesterday on what NFL coaches are calling a marijuana "epidemic" in this year's draft class. According to several high-profile coaches and managers, a high majority of potential first round draft picks in this year's draft have been red flagged for marijuana use in their past. This only reassures what many people have been reporting lately: drug use is still on the rise among college students, especially athletes.

Some of these coaches admit that earlier in their careers if a player failed a drug test his name would immediately be taken off the draft board and his hopes of playing professional football would be shot. Sadly, the situation is different today. Many teams will excuse an athlete's drug problems if they feel it falls under "experimentation" rather than addiction. Players are even coming forward and admitting to drug use in hopes that it will alleviate any potential setbacks in their career.

Last year's NFL Rookie of the Year, Percy Harvin, was drafted by the Minnesota Vikings even though he tested positive for marijuana at the NFL combine. His success and the success of others like him have led NFL teams to relax their drug standards.

Twenty years ago, college athletes risked their entire career by taking drugs. Today, they know that they can enjoy recreational drugs and get away with nothing more than a slap on the wrist. It used to be that athletes were respected for keeping their bodies pure. Now, between steroids and pot, we have no idea what athletes are putting in their bodies. They are tainting themselves and the game.

Philadelphia Freedom

2010-03-24T14:39:00.000-07:00

I spent the last two days in Philadelphia with Bill and the America Unplugged Tour with Michael Medved and Mike Gallagher. Tuesday night they packed out the Keswick Theater and put on a great informative and engaging show.

Some thoughts and pictures from the road:

The liberal media continues to hound conservatives, especially tea partiers, for being racist extremists who use their rallies to spew hate mongering expletives at anyone associated with the Democrats or President Obama. This is nothing new from the left's worn out playbook. They always latch on to a hand full of crazies and then generalize about the entire conservative movement. Remember when pro-lifers were all right wing extremists who wanted to bomb abortion clinics? Well, here's a warning to the liberal media: don't confuse passion with vitriol.

There were no pitchforks and torches in the crowd in Philadelphia. Granted, there was the occasional chorus of boos, but there were no calls to arms or riot rousing rhetoric. These people are gracious, every day Americans who just want to be heard. For those on the left to say that they haven't seen such hatred and bigotry since the Civil Rights movement, is simply absurd. Not to mention the fact that the preponderance of the left's evidence for this comes from Democratic Congressmen who claim that tea partiers spit on them and cursed at them. Most Americans don't believe Congress as it is, so why would they believe this.

Back stage at the WNTP America Unplugged Stop.

Great night in a great town.

The show must go on. Morning In America on the road at WNTP.

Must See TV

2010-03-19T03:23:00.000-07:00

Much has been made of Bret Baier's interview with President Obama on Fox News the other night. If you watched the video or follow the blogs, you would know that those on the left have been crying foul over the amount of times Brett Baier interrupts President Obama. Granted, the interview was contentious, but if the biggest problem you have with the interview is their civility, then you are missing the bigger issue. President Obama stonewalled almost the entire interview and hardly ever answered one of Brett's questions directly.

Brett asked poignantly about the Slaughter rule vote, the special deals, and the procedures of the health care vote and President Obama kept dodging the question and shifting his answer to the need for health care reform. The President came off as aloof to the biggest concerns of the American people: they don't want the bill and they are disgusted by the ways the Democrats are trying to jam the bill through Congress.

Eddie Aikau R.I.P March 17,1978

2010-03-17T14:51:00.000-07:00

The ultimate act of sacrifice.

Today, March 17th, marks the 32nd anniversary of the disappearance of legendary Hawaiian surfer and waterman Eddie Aikau. It was on this fateful day that he and his crew set sail from Hawaii to Tahiti on their way to reenact the 2,400 mile Polynesian migration. Eddie was only 31-years-old and he had just won one of the biggest surfing competitions in Hawaii. But more important to him than any surf competition was this voyage across the great Pacific Ocean.

Immediately after they left port, Eddie and his crew encountered terrible weather with strong winds and high seas. Only five hours into their journey, their boat capsized and the entire crew was left clinging to the side of the ship for their lives. After almost an entire day of shooting off flares and trying to signal planes overhead, the cold was starting to set in and the crew was gradually drifting farther and farther from land.

Eddie realized that the longer they waited, the higher the chance would be that they would never be found. So Eddie begged the captain to let him take out the surfboard he had brought with him and try to paddle to the island of Lanai, which was only 12 miles away. At first the captain resisted, but as the situation became more dire he allowed Eddie to go.

That morning of March 17th was the last time Eddie was ever seen again.

Late that evening, a plane overhead spotted a flare the remaining crew had sent off and soon rescue ships were on their way. Once they reached port safely, a massive search party was sent to find Eddie, but the returned empty handed.

Today, Eddie's sacrifice and heroism are remembered by Quiksilver's big-wave tournament "The Eddie" held in his name at Waimea Bay. In addition, the popular catchphrase "Eddie Would Go" is displayed proudly on the shirts and bumper stickers of thousands of people all across the world.

We can all agree on this...

2010-03-17T08:34:00.000-07:00

If President Obama is looking for some common ground in the fight for health care reform, he can rest assured that Republicans and Democrats are agreeing on one thing: the Slaughter rule is no way to pass a bill.

With the Democrats still short of the votes they need for an up and down vote in the House, some Democrat leaders are suggesting that they skirt the vote and use the Louise Slaughter rule, where the House just votes on amendments to the Senate bill in a procedural vote and then surreptitiously claims that the Senate bill has already been voted on.

Republicans have come out in a fury against this, and even yesterday, CNN's own Jack Cafferty had this to say about it, "Politically speaking, this is beyond sleazy. It's meant to protect Democrats - especially those up for re-election in November - from having to make a tough vote. Pelosi says of this process, 'I like it... because people don't have to vote on the Senate bill.' In Nancy Pelosi's world, accountability is a dirty word."

Cafferty adds, "The Senate bill, of course, contains many provisions that are unpopular among some House Democrats - including language on abortion funding and taxes on high-cost insurance plans.Republicans are jumping all over this - and rightfully so. They're painting it as a way for Democrats to avoid taking responsibility. Some even suggest it's unconstitutional.

"Meanwhile President Obama is campaigning relentlessly - calling on lawmakers to pass health care reform, 'I want some courage. I want us to do the right thing.'

"The irony here is if Nancy Pelosi gets her way, it won't take much courage at all on the part of our so-called representatives."

Cafferty couldn't be more right. Evoking the Slaughter rule would be gutless and "beyond sleazy."

Israel and US tensions

2010-03-16T09:36:00.000-07:00

If you don't already read the Corner at National Review Online, then you're missing out on the best up-to-the-mintue conservative commentary on the entire web. My boss, Seth Leibsohn, Producer of Bill Bennett's Morning In America and fellow of the Claremont Institue, had a great response to the lead headline in the New York Times today. Here is it and you can read it on the Corner here.

Blazoned across the NYT today is the headline: “Israel Feeling Rising Anger From U.S.” How I just pray for the headline someday that reads ”Iran Feeling Rising Anger From U.S.” or “Venezuela Feeling Rising Anger From U.S.” or “Cuba Feeling Rising Anger From U.S.” or “Myanmar Feeling Rising Anger From U.S.” or “Sudan Feeling Rising Anger From U.S.”

Instead we get a story that states in paragraph one: “The most serious conflicts between the United States and Israel in two decades is leaving a politically embarrassed Israeli government scrambling to respond to a tough list of demands by the Obama administration.”

All this, by the way, as the same issue of the NYT today reports Iran is set to hang six more protesters — and of course, as you know, that's the country where the U.S. “should not be seen as meddling.”

Lady GaGa banned by MTV?!

2010-03-15T12:16:00.000-07:00

Lady GaGa likes to make trouble. The notoriously risque pop singer thrives on the attention she receives from her blatantly erotic and controversial outfits and performances. After a solid year of daily media exposure, it's safe to say that Lady Gaga tries harder than any other pop star to push the limits of what is culturally comfortable, especially for the younger generation of America.

Well, now that her latest music video, "Telephone" featuring Beyoncé, has been banned by MTV for it's inappropriate content, it looks like she's finally crossed the line from scandalous to obscene.

Ironically, the song itself is not the problem. In fact, the lyrics are about girls not wanting to answer their phones because there too busy dancing. If you could slap a movie rating on the song it would be PG. The music video, on the other hand, is an R-rated monster.

It features extremely strong expletives, full-frontal nudity, scantily clad women, violence, and lesbian make-out scenes. The video is an overdose of shock value, and coming in at over 9 minutes long, it's more like a short film than a music video. What worries me the most about the video is that young girls who enjoy the song will go looking for the music video and unknowingly expose themselves to a barrage of filthy, tasteless images.

It's encouraging that MTV has taken the initiative to protect its audience. A video like this does nothing to empower women; it will only confuse and disorient the already fragile psyche of America's youth.

Obama and the Great White Whale

2010-03-12T03:33:00.000-08:00

Dennis Kneale of CNBC had a great analogy on Wednesday for President Obama and his do-or-die health care program. He said, "So now it becomes clear: President Obama as Ahab, a political martyr wannabe who willfully straps himself to his own Moby Dick, that great white whale of a $1 trillion health-care overhaul."

Kneale, like many other commentators, feels that a health care bill in some form is inevitable. And like Ahab, once that harpoon plunges into the whale, down goes the Obama Presidency and the entire Democrat ship.

What's even more tragic, he says, is the fact that Obama seems content to sacrifice anything he can for his health care plan. The ripples of his decision will be felt long after the splash. We've already seen the backlash in states like New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Virginia.

Democrats are running D.C. like it's a sports team, and they are having about as much success as most D.C. sports teams. A popular catch phrase among managers in sports is, "If you listen to the fans, you'll be sitting with the fans."This has become the new, governing Democrat motto. The only problem is that choosing a draft pick or a starting pitcher has no impact on the lives and futures of the American people; however, choosing health care does.

A new CNN poll taken from January 22 to January 24, said that 69 percent of respondents say Congress should trash the current Democratic health care proposal and either write an entirely new health bill or stop working on the it altogether. The Democrats can't continue to ignore the will of the people or else they will share the ocean floor with Ahab and his crew while the great white whale lives on, louder and angrier than ever before.

Avatar

2010-03-05T18:41:00.000-08:00

I finally had the time to go see Avatar. Now that it's been named the highest grossing movie of all time, beating Director James Cameron's own Titanic, I figured it was time to see what all the hype was about. My first thoughts are that the special effects, CGI, and costume work were mind numbingly incredible. The 3-D experience is going to change movie watching forever, as we are gradually seeing more and more high-budget flicks go to 3-D, like Alice in Wonderland.

That being said, the rest of the movie didn't deliver for me. It awkwardly walked the line between Disney-esque, enchanting fairytale and science fiction thriller. The acting left much to be desired; in fact, the acting of the Na'vi was far more composed and animated. The script was juvenile and cliche. It was as if they threw in random, unnecessary expletives and violence just to get a PG-13 rating and the viewership that goes with it.

As expected, the political undertones in Avatar were so rampantly anti-Bush and the war that they were almost laughable. The head of the human base is naive, brash and willing to kill innocent people and children on Pandora in search a certin valuable metal. At one point the evil, heartless military captain shouts, "We will fight terror with terror" as he starts his attack on the innocent Na'vi.

Avatar deserves praise for its groundbreaking special effects, but it clearly didn't deserve Best Director and Best Picture and I'm glad the Hurt Locker took its place instead.

DC Blizzard

2010-03-05T15:33:00.000-08:00

Now that spring has finally is here, I thought I'd remind everyone of the kind of winter that we really went through here.

A view of Georgetown that we don't get too often. It looks like it got shaken up in a snow globe.

This is what I had to walk through to get to work. At least there wasn't any traffic.

And this is what it looked like after the storm. Yes, those are cars under there.

oh so modern

2010-03-01T15:55:00.000-08:00